i know, and if someone keeps harping on about them again, i'll do my bloody nana!!!

I think the text is fine.

Cairns, did you know that the swords are blurry? Yeah, I kinda just wanted to see what a "bloody nana" wasReally, this map is looking good. I can't quite wrap my head around the gameplay (as in, whether the bonuses are appropriate or not), but I think this should be in the main foundry now where eyes better than mine can pick it apart for gameplay.

I like the rearrangement of the legend a lot. I'm not crazy about the title/legend font, though. To me it looks more Arabic than Caribbean. You could probably find something better, but this is a relatively minor issue.

OK, so some of my niggles have been addressed... but the priority absolutely has to be getting some analysis of the gameplay... Cairns, you know your thoughts and the map better than anybody else... what's your opinion?

PB: 2661 | He's blue...If he were green he would die | No mod would be stupid enough to do that

sailorseal....as a good contribution to the mapping foundry at large, it has been mentioned many times before on various other map threads that when one makes a comment, if someone doesn't like something, it would be very helpful and indeed a positive if the commenter would make some suggestion as to what they would like to see. Please don't hesitate to say so with your colours challenge.Currently the colours will be heading towardsbut gameplay has to be sorted out first, and indeed if you notice the thread topic which mentions "Gameplay???" you might see that i require comments on Gameplay.....(hint hint) please pretty please

Do the ports connect via dotted lines? If so, wouldn't I, as Bristol, just have to win 6v3,3 (port maria, st. ann's bay), then possibly another 3 (liverpool) to eliminate someone? Not saying it's a smart move, nor probable, but it could happen.

the.killing.44 wrote:Do the ports connect via dotted lines? If so, wouldn't I, as Bristol, just have to win 6v3,3 (port maria, st. ann's bay), then possibly another 3 (liverpool) to eliminate someone? Not saying it's a smart move, nor probable, but it could happen..44

OK. do we need to bump the ports up to 5 neutral?

tlane wrote:I have a few comments for the map right now, and i really like how it is comingOne thing i think you should change is the size of some of the icons, Specifically the cobs and the coffee, i would just make them a little bit bigger.Maybe i haven't read enough of this and it is not that important, but why are there giant 3's in the army circles. Shouldn't there be 88's if anything.That's all I have for now, I like this map a lottlane

Yes i can do that, but i'm after game play suggestions at present please.

the.killing.44 wrote:Do the ports connect via dotted lines? If so, wouldn't I, as Bristol, just have to win 6v3,3 (port maria, st. ann's bay), then possibly another 3 (liverpool) to eliminate someone? Not saying it's a smart move, nor probable, but it could happen..44

OK. do we need to bump the ports up to 5 neutral?

I'd say so, but in a 5+p game nothing would happen in the first round. That might not really be a bad thing, though. Just delay the game 1 round. 4neu?

Right now I'm thinking about London … does it have a disadvantage? I mean, the resources are there, and it does have that roue to Galleon Harbor and P. Morant, but that's an extra 3 neutrals to get through just to be one territory away from being adjacent to another ship …

One idea for game play would be to have an auto-deploy on the home ports(the places where the people start), like a 3 person auto deploy. Or you could have a 3 or 4 person bonus, for each home port, which each player would get automatically

the.killing.44 wrote:...I'd say so, but in a 5+p game nothing would happen in the first round. That might not really be a bad thing, though. Just delay the game 1 round. 4neu?

4 is OK also, but if it is a 5, some players might have better luck than others with the dice and this might also cause a slight advantage for some players.

Right now I'm thinking about London … does it have a disadvantage? I mean, the resources are there, and it does have that roue to Galleon Harbor and P. Morant, but that's an extra 3 neutrals to get through just to be one territory away from being adjacent to another ship …

doesn't London have an advantage of not being attacked straight away as you stated above.if london having that advantage, then perhaps GH and PM need to be lowered as far as neutrals go?

tlane wrote:One idea for game play would be to have an auto-deploy on the home ports(the places where the people start), like a 3 person auto deploy. Or you could have a 3 or 4 person bonus, for each home port, which each player would get automatically

if this is already in the map, sorry i re-said ittlane

OK, that's a reasonable suggestion, and no it hasn't been suggested...good on you. The only thing with that, is the auto-deploy would not be allocated until next round. That would still leave the port vulnerable if the player having the next turn is homed at a neighbouring port. I could be wrong here, but i think that's the way auto-deploys work.

tlane wrote:One idea for game play would be to have an auto-deploy on the home ports(the places where the people start), like a 3 person auto deploy. Or you could have a 3 or 4 person bonus, for each home port, which each player would get automatically

if this is already in the map, sorry i re-said ittlane

OK, that's a reasonable suggestion, and no it hasn't been suggested...good on you. The only thing with that, is the auto-deploy would not be allocated until next round. That would still leave the port vulnerable if the player having the next turn is homed at a neighbouring port. I could be wrong here, but i think that's the way auto-deploys work.

Yes, you are right (i think).One idea that could maybe fix that, is if the ports, that the home ports have to attack to go anywhere, started with like eight, and then that would force the players to wait to the second or third round to attack, even with the auto-deploy

For one, I think the auto-deploy — which is a good idea — should only be two and should be limited to the ships. From there, somewhere from 4-7 neutrals on the ports seem fine; 3+2+3=7 max, and in a large game 7v4-7is way too much of a gamble. The problem I see comes after that, where you say "Coastal slaves can attack ships). That's fine and all, but I suggest you keep the coastal slaves non-adjacent to the ports. From Liverpool, e.g., St. Anne's Bay to Dry Harbor, which has a slave, is only relatively good dice from eliminating any player across the board. This also takes away the problem of more neutrals on ports, as the slaves are still 3 and for Liverpool the same amount of territories but 1-3 less neutrals to beat. So, I say either/both keep the slaves away from the coast and/or make them 4 neutrals.

That leads to the other point, which is the disadvantage given to London. The nearest slave is 3 territories minimum away from the Port, while all other ships only have to go through 1-2.